Get E-Mail Updates

Conservative Catholicism's Political Enforcers

As a struggling Catholic, the uproar and division caused by conservative U.S. Catholic groups (with the blessing and help of conservative bishops), has not helped me on my journey to attempt to follow Jesus' teachings within the Catholic tradition. The motive of these groups and individuals, it seems, is to force their understanding of Catholicism on others.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

Conservative Catholics seem to share several common beliefs:

  • The neo-liberal free market is the best economic system.
  • The death penalty is morally acceptable.
  • Catholicism should exclude individuals and groups who disagree with any one of the pope's "infallible" teachings.
  • Sexual morality (i.e., use of contraception and marriage) is a crucial factor in determining one's orthodoxy.
  • Abortion trumps all other issues, including war, environmental destruction, and poverty.

As a result of these conservative ideals, many conservative U.S. Catholics identify themselves strongly with the Republican Party. This is not a problem. The issue is when these conservative U.S. Catholics force all others to align themselves with neo-liberal economic policies and conservative social stances under the umbrella of orthodox Catholicism. Jesus did not advocate war, or laissez-faire economics that disregard the plight of the poor, or the exclusion of any group, be they prostitutes, slaves, or criminals.

Yet this does not keep militantly conservative U.S. Catholics from continuing to be vociferous in advocating and forcing upon others their vision of orthodox Catholicism. And unfortunately, since the public tends to heed those who are loud and dramatic, many may mistakenly assume that these individuals represent Jesus and Catholic social teaching. Catholicism and Catholic social teaching, however, are far richer and deeper than identification with any political party or ideology.

Here are three examples of chasms caused by U.S. conservative Catholic groups: 1) the Obama/Notre Dame controversy; 2) conservative commentator and John Paul II biographer George Weigel's hubristic response to Pope Benedict XVI's latest social encyclical; and 3) the response by some to late Senator Kennedy's Catholic funeral.

Earlier in the year, the University of Notre Dame invited President Obama to be its commencement speaker and honorary degree recipient -- continuing its tradition of inviting U.S. presidents. As soon as the news broke, however, conservative Catholic groups (such as the Cardinal Newman Society) and bishops (like Archbishop John Nienstedt) all throughout the U.S. called for Notre Dame to rescind its invitation, citing Obama's pro-abortion stance as morally contrary to Catholic teaching. This reaction was the climax of a smear campaign of Obama begun by several U.S. bishops and Catholic organizations after his resounding November election victory. Several U.S. Catholic bishops voiced their preference for McCain during the campaign, and several went as far as saying that an Obama supporter's soul is in danger. Since the majority of U.S. Catholic voters favored Obama during the presidential election, the majority also supported Notre Dame's decision to invite the president.

Then, in July, following the release of Pope Benedict's social encyclical Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth), conservative U.S. Catholic commentator George Weigel released an essay titled Caritas in Veritate in Gold and Red: The revenge of Justice and Peace (or so they may think), wherein he accuses Benedict of crafting an incoherent encyclical that Weigel claims contradicts the conservative John Paul II's stance on economic justice. He suggests, as the title demonstrates, that one could read the encyclical and cross out with a red pen the parts crafted by the Catholic Church's Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace while highlighting in gold those parts written by Benedict. Essentially, according to Weigel, one should disregard those parts advocating economic justice for the poor and oppressed as Justice and Peace fodder. Shocking to even some U.S. conservative Catholics was Weigel's arrogant conclusion that "Benedict XVI, a truly gentle soul, may have thought it necessary to include in his encyclical these multiple [economic justice] off-notes, in order to maintain the peace within the curial household." Pope Benedict's criticism of capitalism shocks many conservatives, so Weigel was simply articulating the fears of many U.S. conservative Catholics that their beloved institution may not approve of their economic ideology.

Finally, in August Sen. Edward Kennedy's Catholic funeral brought condemnation from several conservative U.S. Catholic groups. For instance, C.J. Doyle of Catholic Action League of Massachusetts accused the U.S. Catholic Church of succumbing to cultural pressures for giving Kennedy a broadcasted Catholic funeral. Doyle argued that Sen. Kennedy's support of abortion and gay marriage made him a false and bad Catholic. Again, here we see the conservative focus on sexual morality in determining one's orthodoxy or relationship to God. Cardinal Sean O'Malley of the Archdiocese of Boston passionately defended his decision to participate in Kennedy's funeral mass. Further, he warned that being divisive will "do irreparable damage to the communion of the Church."

Fortunately, these militant conservative groups represent a minority -- albeit a vocal minority -- in the U.S. Catholic Church and certainly in the worldwide Catholic Church, which mainly consists of Latin Americans, Asians, and Africans. These divisive groups only alienate those of us who do not understand the Catholic Church to be a pawn of the Republican Party and its ideals. Maybe they should ask themselves an important question: "What would Jesus do?"

portrait-cesar-baldelomarCésar J. Baldelomar is a graduate student at Harvard Divinity School. He is also the executive director of Pax Romana Center for International Study of Catholic Social Teaching. You can visit César at his Web site (www.cesarjb.org) and read his blogs at www.holisticthoughts.com.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: josieperl47

10-01-2009 @ 12:12am

"It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long."

When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that abortion is intrinsically evil and immoral?

When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that being a homosexual is intrinsically evil and immoral?

by: josieperl47

10-01-2009 @ 12:22am

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals? <<<<<

Only when he speaks "ex cathedra."

by: RorateCaeli

10-01-2009 @ 1:21am

Since at least the apostolic era but clearly before the the 2000 election.

by: kansasmennonite

10-01-2009 @ 1:24am

Didn't the majority of Catholics vote for Obama? The point here is that the loudest voices are the replublican wing of the church. Trying to push everyone around with their "pet" project. Actually sounds like most churches (there I go generalizing again).

by: 1Grace

10-01-2009 @ 6:00am

"We get the point: Catholics should model the Democratic Party "

lol , Your right it was getting a bit thick in the self righteousness arena .
As seen recently on the health Care Debate attempt by republicans to Amend the Bill to make sure abortion would not be funded , the democrats said no after repeatedly spokespeople for organizations that are pawns for rthe democrats stated abortion was not to be funded . A chance to unite more Americans and support healthcare , not a chance . The democrats see health care as basic health care , no more then any ailment .

The religious left cares about many of the same issues that the religious right do , they just have more concerns that reflect the secular culture concept of helping . . Nothing wrong with the secular culture either may I add in what the religious left identifies with .. " the policies don't work though"
The poor, Health care , and the Environment to name a few. All principles all Christians share , or should have in common in my opinion .

But picking on the Catholics and core beliefs is not really something I think is beneficial to the Church as a whole .
People who claim to be Catholics I believe voted more for democrats . Like to think they believed In Hope , Helping people , and the things Obama I thought stood for .

Cesar has a problem showing that Hope from a political or religious side from his essay. Seems Hope and Charity is a very partsian concept these days .

. I have seen many pro Catholics and Evangelicals just raked over the coals because they are pro life , Take Jesus at HIS word that He is the Truth , The Way . And yet live lives that reflect nothing but compassion for those in need , try to make sure they are a good example to those unbelievers , and even some of them , On dear ...vote republican.

by: WaveTossed

10-01-2009 @ 7:04pm

"When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that being a homosexual is intrinsically evil and immoral?"

This business of gay people being "intrinsically disordered" and commiting "intrinsically evil and immoral acts" has been the doctrine since Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) wrote this sometime during the early 21st century.

I know that I'm confused by current Catholic doctrine. On one hand, Catholic doctrine states that homosexuals are not able to change. On the other hand, they also state that homosexuals are "intrinsically disordered." I gather that this is a way of saying that gay people have Bad Karma; they were born that way -- perhaps they had sinned in a previous life, I gather. Though I don't think that the Roman Catholic church believes in reincarnation.

by: RorateCaeli

10-02-2009 @ 3:36pm

I see from what you referenced that it wasn't simply about legislating to prevent people from visiting each other in the hospital but perhaps if you provide the link to the LEGISLATION.... instead of what someone posted on a blog I could responde appropriately. You said "the Catholic Church involved itself in fighting legislation that allows gays to visit their friends/partners in a hospital?" I see from the link that it was probably more than just granting hospital visits but since you didn't link to the legislation I can't really evaluate your position fully.

Yes the Catholic Church opposes homosexual marriage that is not new nor is it due to republican political machinations. The reason is clearly articulted in the document you cited.

by: WaveTossed

10-02-2009 @ 11:21am

Some links. This one is an official Vatican document, written by the man who is now the Pope.:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations...

Particularly relevant is the following excerpt:

"If it is true that all Catholics are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions, Catholic politicians are obliged to do so in a particular way, in keeping with their responsibility as politicians. Faced with legislative proposals in favour of homosexual unions, Catholic politicians are to take account of the following ethical indications.

When legislation in favour of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favour of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral."

This section has been interpreted by many Catholic bishops to mean that to support even measures that would allow for hospital visitation would be "voting in favor of homosexual unions." And thus they have mounted campaigns to oppose these laws.

A report on the campaign by the Maryland Catholic Conference to oppose a bill allowing hospital visitation for gay partners.

http://www.purpleunions.com/blog/2008/06/gay-ma...

This site is a long blog about gay marriage, but the relevant passage is this:

"In early March, legislators decided they wouldn't be able to pass civil unions or gay marriage, so they plan to pass a series of smaller measures adding rights piecemeal. In mid-March, the Senate took up legislation to allow same sex couples to make medical decisions for each other. On 4/1, the Senate passed a measure to allow xfer of property between same sex couples without recordation taxes. A bill to waive inheritance taxes for same sex couples was held up in both chambers. On 4/10, the legislature sent a bill to the Governor giving same sex couples additional medical decision-making rights. On 5/10, The Maryland Catholic Conference called on Gov. Martin O'Malley yesterday to veto two bills the group contends would undermine the legal status of marriage in Maryland. On 5/22, Gov. O'Malley signed both measures into law."

As for being a voter, you can vote in whatever way you wish. However, the Catholic church, as an institution, has no right to legislate their theology upon the people of Maryland. As you can see, the governor ignored the Maryland Catholic Conference and signed the bill allowing for hospital visitation.

by: josieperl47

10-02-2009 @ 1:27am

Abortion rate statistics support what you say.

Obama has said he is personally against abortion, as did John Kerry. George W. Bush admitted in an interview that if one of his daughters was pregnant, he'd counsel her to have the baby but in the end, it would be her choice.

The views of the 3 men are more alike than different. Sarah Palin even said she didn't want to put people in jail for participating in abortion, which puts her pretty much in the same camp as Obama and Kerry.

by: josieperl47

10-02-2009 @ 1:08am

Ironically, it's exactly the type of thing you wrote that has caused me to leave the church (not the faith but the physical church).

I truly struggle to figure out why people such as yourself want to paint me as you do. I want to prevent abortion and I spend a great deal of time, money and effort working toward that goal.

I also vote with that goal in mind. And I don't vote for the candidate who gets all weepy eyed during a speech, calls himself "pro-life" and then never does anything to help promote life. Especially when he votes down legislation that would provide health care, shelter and/or nutrition to a young mother of 3 who's struggling with another pregnancy. Actions speak louder than words.

by: josieperl47

10-02-2009 @ 12:39am

I can't quite understand why you're not hearing the words I'm saying but I'll try one more time. I'm talking about what was taught and sermonized at MY Catholic Church and what was taught through public commentary and publicity by certain bishops around the country. We were strongly encouraged to vote for the anti-gay legislation and were pretty much told that if we didn't, we were complicit to the sin of homosexuality.

And it was VERY clear that if I voted for John Kerry, I could, would and/or should be barred from receiving Communion. Did anyone give me the benefit of the doubt and try to understand that I want to PREVENT abortion, not pass laws that put doctors and women in jail after the fact?

And many good people remain in the Catholic Church. Many people are trying to be good followers of Christ. I have no issue with them, nor they with me.

by: clave

10-02-2009 @ 12:35am

Seriously. Except that he actually doesn't appear to "advocate for promoting" abortion, on demand or otherwise. Tell me when he's directed any pregnant woman to go have an abortion. Has any pregnant woman said, President Obama wants me to have an abortion, so that's what I'll do? For the sake of truth and fairness, I'd prefer to describe only those who are pro-abortion, as in advocating abortion, as "pro-abortion." That is not the same as "pro-choice," though many in the pro-life movement seem to lump them together for ideological purity or something. I think that ultimately hurts the pro-life cause, though.

You are free to fantasize about Barack Obama pushing abortions on pregnant women or stuff like that, if you like. You are free to buy whatever you want, etc. But please remember God's commandment against bearing false witness against your neighbor. You may not think of even a president you oppose as your neighbor, but he is.

by: RorateCaeli

10-01-2009 @ 11:10pm

Seriously? President Obama certainly does advocate for promoting abortion on demand. I don't wish to ignore it... you are free to call me what you will but I don't think it will change my mind.

I do think votes have consequences and voting for someone who supports abortion on demand by voting for whenever it comes up... it is not an option for me.... Thanks but I am not buying it.

by: clave

10-01-2009 @ 10:54pm

I don't think it's unreasonable to hold that President Obama does not seem to have advocated, recommended, or favored abortion. Has he? Like I said, he's taken the neither pro- nor anti-abortion stand, and I'll take that over the politicians who may even vocally decry abortion but push policies that increase its appeal.

I realize that the politically correct, ideologically pure position for many pro-life people is to push for a permanent top-down ban on abortion. That's also the most unlikely to be attained, though it's great for rallying the troops.

I'll gladly trade righteous ineffectuality for pragmatic progress. In this pluralistic society, abortion is best addressed by steadily reducing demand. The recession is a far bigger threat to the unborn than the occupant of the White House is. If Obama can help reduce the economic despair and injustice in our society, he'll probably have done more for the pro-life position than most of us realize.

by: kansasmennonite

10-01-2009 @ 10:40pm

Does this apply to politicians who approve of war that kills women, children, men, etc.?

by: RorateCaeli

10-01-2009 @ 9:39pm

I don't think it is unreasonable, in a democracy, to hold those accountable who vote to legislate or advocate in favor of abortion. I don't think it is unreasonable to hold that President Obama has voted against even the most modest restictions on abortion. You are free to disagree with that... But if you are going to say he isn't responsible for what people do in light of the legislation he helps pass....? Is that what you saying?

by: RorateCaeli

10-01-2009 @ 9:29pm

I must have missed that one... the sole purpose of the legislation is to barr homosexuals from visiting friends/partners in the hospital. Hmm, why don't you provide a link for the legislation and I will let you know.
"However, the Catholic church has no right to legislate their beliefs upon the rest of the population." They don't... but some of us vote.

by: WaveTossed

10-01-2009 @ 7:04pm

"When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that being a homosexual is intrinsically evil and immoral?"

This business of gay people being "intrinsically disordered" and commiting "intrinsically evil and immoral acts" has been the doctrine since Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) wrote this sometime during the early 21st century.

I know that I'm confused by current Catholic doctrine. On one hand, Catholic doctrine states that homosexuals are not able to change. On the other hand, they also state that homosexuals are "intrinsically disordered." I gather that this is a way of saying that gay people have Bad Karma; they were born that way -- perhaps they had sinned in a previous life, I gather. Though I don't think that the Roman Catholic church believes in reincarnation.

by: clave

10-01-2009 @ 7:34pm

If Obama is "pro-abortion," then certainly those who label him thusly can tell us what abortions he has caused or facilitated.

Who is truly "pro-abortion"? Is it the politician who takes a neutral stance on the issue, as Kennedy and Obama have? Or is it the politician who may denounce abortion publicly but who promotes policies that increase economic stress on families, so that an additional mouth to feed is a burden instead of a blessing?

by: WaveTossed

10-01-2009 @ 7:17pm

Respectfully, I must point out: You avoided Josieperl's question.

She/he asked why did the Catholic Church involved itself in fighting legislation that allows gays to visit their friends/partners in a hospital? This happened not only in Ohio but in Maryland, where I live. This legislation doesn't involve anyone having sex either within or outside of marriage. This involves visiting the sick in a hospital. Why is the Catholic church opposed to allowing people to visit their sick partners or friends? Is it because gay people are "intrinsically disordered" and so should not be treated as anyone else would be treated?

As free people, Roman Catholics are allowed to believe whatever they wish about "intrinsically disordered" gay people or about anything else. And I have the same sovereign right to not be Catholic. However, the Catholic church has no right to legislate their beliefs upon the rest of the population.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 2:55pm

You seem to be painting with a very wide brush, Cesar. People who follow the Church's teaching don't all "disregard the plight of the poor, or the exclusion of any group" just because they disagree with which policies will ameliorate the problem.

It seems that you disagree with Catholic teaching on a number of subjects but would rather discuss the "straw man" of "conservative Catholics."

"Catholicism should exclude individuals and groups who disagree with any one of the pope's "infallible" teachings."

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope (if your Catholic you really should capitalize the reference to the office out of respect, just as I would capitalize President when referring to the President) is infallible in matters of faith and morals? You seem to suggest this is something that was "invented" by some republican party operative.

"Sexual morality (i.e., use of contraception and marriage) is a crucial factor in determining one's orthodoxy." Again, doesn't the Catholic Church have a specific teaching on the subject? Did that originate with the republican party?

"Abortion trumps all other issues, including war, environmental destruction, and poverty." If destruction of the innocent human life in the womb is not categorically worse than poverty than the state should be allowed to force abortions in order to "cure" poverty as they do in China. Again, you seem to suggest that this is a 'conservative' talking point. It has been the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church that some things are intrinsically evil and others are not...

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:03pm

Also,
I think that viewing Catholic teaching as simply a matter of Conservative/Progressive politics is itself contrary to Catholic teaching...
"Precisely because the Gospel is not an ideology, it does not presume to lock evolving socio-political realities into rigid schemas. Rather, it transcends the vicissitudes of this world and casts new light on the dignity of the human person in every age. Dear friends, let us ask the Lord to implant within us a spirit of courage to share the timeless saving truths which have shaped, and will continue to shape, the social and cultural progress of this continent.

The salvation wrought by Jesus's suffering, death, resurrection and ascension into heaven not only transforms us who believe in him, but urges us to share this Good News with others. Enlightened by the Spirit's gifts of knowledge, wisdom and understanding (cf. Is 11:1-2; Ex 35:31), may our capacity to grasp the truth taught by Jesus Christ impel us to work tirelessly for the unity he desires for all his children reborn through Baptism, and indeed for the whole human race.
Benedict XVI"
Address at Ecumenical Meeting
September 27, 2009

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 3:18pm

Cesar,

You have two choices. You can remain (as I did for years) in a church which selectively applies Christ's teachings to be congruent with a conservative Republican mindset. Or you can move (as I finally did) to a church or church organization which does not mandate a particular political doctrine while it ministers to believers.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:21pm

With respect to the Kennedy funeral... What Mr. Doyle said can be found here http://www.catholicactionleague.org/ I didn't see where Mr. Doyle called the late Senator a "false Catholic" Here is what Archbishop Raymond Burke had to say on the subject as reported in CNA: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17250

"In our time, there is a great hesitation to speak about scandal, as if, in some way, it is only a phenomenon among persons of small or unenlightened mind, and, therefore, a tool of such persons to condemn others rashly and wrongly," he observed.

In the archbishop's view, it is ironic that those who experience scandal at the "gravely sinful" public actions of a fellow Catholic are accused of "a lack of charity" and of causing division within the Church.

"Lying or failing to tell the truth, however, is never a sign of charity. A unity which is not founded on the truth of the moral law is not the unity of the Church. The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth with love," he remarked.

The contrary attitude is characteristic of a society governed by the "tyranny of relativism," one in which "political correctness and human respect" are the ultimate criteria, he said, warning that Catholics' consciences have become "dulled to the gravity of certain moral issues."

Archbishop Burke explained that the disciplines of the Church are not a judgment on the eternal salvation of someone's soul but are "simply the acknowledgment of an objective truth

by: RorateCaeli

10-02-2009 @ 5:36pm

I see from what you referenced that it wasn't simply about legislating to prevent people from visiting each other in the hospital but perhaps if you provide the link to the LEGISLATION.... instead of what someone posted on a blog I could responde appropriately. You said "the Catholic Church involved itself in fighting legislation that allows gays to visit their friends/partners in a hospital?" I see from the link that it was probably more than just granting hospital visits but since you didn't link to the legislation I can't really evaluate your position fully.

Yes the Catholic Church opposes homosexual marriage that is not new nor is it due to republican political machinations. The reason is clearly articulted in the document you cited.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:27pm

Again,
Why are you simply assuming that the Church is motivated to support the "Republican" party? The Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 2:55pm

You seem to be painting with a very wide brush, Cesar. People who follow the Church's teaching don't all "disregard the plight of the poor, or the exclusion of any group" just because they disagree with which policies will ameliorate the problem.

It seems that you disagree with Catholic teaching on a number of subjects but would rather discuss the "straw man" of "conservative Catholics."

"Catholicism should exclude individuals and groups who disagree with any one of the pope's "infallible" teachings."

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope (if your Catholic you really should capitalize the reference to the office out of respect, just as I would capitalize President when referring to the President) is infallible in matters of faith and morals? You seem to suggest this is something that was "invented" by some republican party operative.

"Sexual morality (i.e., use of contraception and marriage) is a crucial factor in determining one's orthodoxy." Again, doesn't the Catholic Church have a specific teaching on the subject? Did that originate with the republican party?

"Abortion trumps all other issues, including war, environmental destruction, and poverty." If destruction of the innocent human life in the womb is not categorically worse than poverty than the state should be allowed to force abortions in order to "cure" poverty as they do in China. Again, you seem to suggest that this is a 'conservative' talking point. It has been the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church that some things are intrinsically evil and others are not...

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 5:10pm

I am a "failed" Catholic. My increasing discomfort with the church's positions on ordination for women, the pronouncement of homosexuality as "disordered" in contradiction to the majority opinion of the clinical community, its seemingly systematic routing of the progressive elements in religious orders and local parishes, its growing intolerance of divergent opinions, and my overall discomfort with the monarchical structure of the church has prompted me, like SisterMarie, to move to a more progressive and tolerant community of followers of Jesus for my spiritual sustenance. It is a decision for me that is bearing spiritual fruit and peace daily. It is a joy to be in an environment that does not expend energy on divisiveness and has respect for differing opinions.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:03pm

Also,
I think that viewing Catholic teaching as simply a matter of Conservative/Progressive politics is itself contrary to Catholic teaching...
"Precisely because the Gospel is not an ideology, it does not presume to lock evolving socio-political realities into rigid schemas. Rather, it transcends the vicissitudes of this world and casts new light on the dignity of the human person in every age. Dear friends, let us ask the Lord to implant within us a spirit of courage to share the timeless saving truths which have shaped, and will continue to shape, the social and cultural progress of this continent.

The salvation wrought by Jesus's suffering, death, resurrection and ascension into heaven not only transforms us who believe in him, but urges us to share this Good News with others. Enlightened by the Spirit's gifts of knowledge, wisdom and understanding (cf. Is 11:1-2; Ex 35:31), may our capacity to grasp the truth taught by Jesus Christ impel us to work tirelessly for the unity he desires for all his children reborn through Baptism, and indeed for the whole human race.
Benedict XVI"
Address at Ecumenical Meeting
September 27, 2009

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 3:18pm

Cesar,

You have two choices. You can remain (as I did for years) in a church which selectively applies Christ's teachings to be congruent with a conservative Republican mindset. Or you can move (as I finally did) to a church or church organization which does not mandate a particular political doctrine while it ministers to believers.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 5:44pm

Ford,
I appreciate your honesty and hope you find peace. But the point of the article appears to be that the current configuration of the Church is a product of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching. I also get the sense that those of us who don't wish to "leave" the Catholic Church are viewed as intolerant jerks who cling to arbitrary definitions or doctrines because we are "republican shills" We can't be given the benefit of the doubt that we wish to pass on to our children the faith as it was taught to us?

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:21pm

With respect to the Kennedy funeral... What Mr. Doyle said can be found here http://www.catholicactionleague.org/ I didn't see where Mr. Doyle called the late Senator a "false Catholic" Here is what Archbishop Raymond Burke had to say on the subject as reported in CNA: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17250

"In our time, there is a great hesitation to speak about scandal, as if, in some way, it is only a phenomenon among persons of small or unenlightened mind, and, therefore, a tool of such persons to condemn others rashly and wrongly," he observed.

In the archbishop's view, it is ironic that those who experience scandal at the "gravely sinful" public actions of a fellow Catholic are accused of "a lack of charity" and of causing division within the Church.

"Lying or failing to tell the truth, however, is never a sign of charity. A unity which is not founded on the truth of the moral law is not the unity of the Church. The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth with love," he remarked.

The contrary attitude is characteristic of a society governed by the "tyranny of relativism," one in which "political correctness and human respect" are the ultimate criteria, he said, warning that Catholics' consciences have become "dulled to the gravity of certain moral issues."

Archbishop Burke explained that the disciplines of the Church are not a judgment on the eternal salvation of someone's soul but are "simply the acknowledgment of an objective truth

by: WaveTossed

09-29-2009 @ 6:09pm

I am not Roman Catholic; I was raised Episcopalian and am comfortable in that denomination. So this is the view of an "outsider."

The idea that current Catholic theology is a result of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching" is misleading. The Roman Catholic church's theology has been of a top-down character -- which has included the doctrine of papal infallibility -- since the Roman Catholic church's early days. This was well before either the Republican or Democratic parties existed -- for that matter, well before the United States came into existence. One reason why the Church of England (the Episcopal church's fore-runner) broke away from the Roman Catholic church was on the matter of papal infallibility.

One of my main reasons for being Episcopalian and not Catholic is this issue of papal infallibility. I do not believe that a single human being, even the Pope, can be infallible. Only God is infallible.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:27pm

Again,
Why are you simply assuming that the Church is motivated to support the "Republican" party? The Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 6:24pm

I wholeheartedly respect those who stay in the Catholic Church. What I
could not abide personally is an environment that is becoming increasingly
strident and judgemental whether one attributes that to identification with
the GOP or not to me is irrelevant. At some point extreme differenes in
viewpoints will have to be left at the cross or the church will be
irreparably split. The church's progressive position on social and economic
justice is being threatened and I will not waste energy fighting that battle
internally...too much is at stake. I am in an environment that is moving
forward while accepting there are differences and laying them at the feet of
Jesus. My prayers are that Catholics and other followers of Jesus keep
their focus on Him.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 7:11pm

Well WaveTossed,
For an "outsider" you heard my point loud and clear. Thank you for that... and look, I don't want to get into Catholic apologetics here... It just seems to me that there cannot be true ecumenism if we don't acknowledge we differ and where we differ. It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long. But I think to suggest that the RCC teaches that abortion is an intrinsic evil because the Pope likes Sarah Palin... well, that does a disservice to all denominations, really. It is a materialistic/political interpretation of doctrine when there isn't any historical basis for it....

by: nuclearferret

09-29-2009 @ 8:17pm

We get the point: Catholics should model the Democratic Party and the neo-liberal mantra presented by President Obama.

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 5:10pm

I am a "failed" Catholic. My increasing discomfort with the church's positions on ordination for women, the pronouncement of homosexuality as "disordered" in contradiction to the majority opinion of the clinical community, its seemingly systematic routing of the progressive elements in religious orders and local parishes, its growing intolerance of divergent opinions, and my overall discomfort with the monarchical structure of the church has prompted me, like SisterMarie, to move to a more progressive and tolerant community of followers of Jesus for my spiritual sustenance. It is a decision for me that is bearing spiritual fruit and peace daily. It is a joy to be in an environment that does not expend energy on divisiveness and has respect for differing opinions.

by: Drixtrious

09-29-2009 @ 9:19pm

hey. It's me, one of your formal students at ACND, and I just want to know if we can communicate w/ each other. My e-mail, if u remember, is dandrix1@ hotmail.com

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 5:44pm

Ford,
I appreciate your honesty and hope you find peace. But the point of the article appears to be that the current configuration of the Church is a product of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching. I also get the sense that those of us who don't wish to "leave" the Catholic Church are viewed as intolerant jerks who cling to arbitrary definitions or doctrines because we are "republican shills" We can't be given the benefit of the doubt that we wish to pass on to our children the faith as it was taught to us?

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 9:47pm

If a church organization maintained a firm but consistent set of principles, I could respect that. I might disagree with them, but I would still respect them. But can anyone cite a case where a significant portion of the church rose up and protested the appearance of a political candidate who initiated an unjust war resulting in the killing of thousands of civilians?

by: WaveTossed

09-29-2009 @ 6:09pm

I am not Roman Catholic; I was raised Episcopalian and am comfortable in that denomination. So this is the view of an "outsider."

The idea that current Catholic theology is a result of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching" is misleading. The Roman Catholic church's theology has been of a top-down character -- which has included the doctrine of papal infallibility -- since the Roman Catholic church's early days. This was well before either the Republican or Democratic parties existed -- for that matter, well before the United States came into existence. One reason why the Church of England (the Episcopal church's fore-runner) broke away from the Roman Catholic church was on the matter of papal infallibility.

One of my main reasons for being Episcopalian and not Catholic is this issue of papal infallibility. I do not believe that a single human being, even the Pope, can be infallible. Only God is infallible.

by: BuckeyeDon

09-29-2009 @ 11:30pm

uh, ferret, you missed the point. Totally. And the term neo-liberal describes the laissez-faire capitalists on the Right, not Obama.

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 6:24pm

I wholeheartedly respect those who stay in the Catholic Church. What I
could not abide personally is an environment that is becoming increasingly
strident and judgemental whether one attributes that to identification with
the GOP or not to me is irrelevant. At some point extreme differenes in
viewpoints will have to be left at the cross or the church will be
irreparably split. The church's progressive position on social and economic
justice is being threatened and I will not waste energy fighting that battle
internally...too much is at stake. I am in an environment that is moving
forward while accepting there are differences and laying them at the feet of
Jesus. My prayers are that Catholics and other followers of Jesus keep
their focus on Him.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 7:11pm

Well WaveTossed,
For an "outsider" you heard my point loud and clear. Thank you for that... and look, I don't want to get into Catholic apologetics here... It just seems to me that there cannot be true ecumenism if we don't acknowledge we differ and where we differ. It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long. But I think to suggest that the RCC teaches that abortion is an intrinsic evil because the Pope likes Sarah Palin... well, that does a disservice to all denominations, really. It is a materialistic/political interpretation of doctrine when there isn't any historical basis for it....

by: nuclearferret

09-29-2009 @ 8:17pm

We get the point: Catholics should model the Democratic Party and the neo-liberal mantra presented by President Obama.

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 12:53am

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/20...
"In March 2003, just hours after the first American cruise missiles slammed into Baghdad, the Vatican proclaimed the nascent conflict a "defeat for reason and for the gospel." It was a war, said papal confidant Cardinal Roberto Tucci, that was "beyond all legality and all international legitimacy." Strong words coming from the clerical leaders of some 1.5 billion Roman Catholics and indicative of the rift that still dogs relations between the president and the pope."
According to Catholic teaching, the use of military force is not an intrinsic evil as is abortion. The use of such force is subject to several conditions on whose existence reasonable people can disagree. However, there is no reasonable disagreement in case of procured abortion. This is easily discoverable using many resources on the internet. Again I ask, the Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: Drixtrious

09-29-2009 @ 9:19pm

hey. It's me, one of your formal students at ACND, and I just want to know if we can communicate w/ each other. My e-mail, if u remember, is dandrix1@ hotmail.com

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 9:57am

I have noticed and blogged about this for some time now. There are many converts to Catholocism from the repuplican party. One is Sam Brownback from my state of Kansas. A mennonite pastor Shane Hipps from Phoenix wrote a book on the subject of how the media we are around influences us and since the Catholic system has many symbols it appeals to those growning up with symbols, etc. Goes into great depth in the book.

I have also said on this blog that the conservative Catholics pick and choose the church's teachings. Remember all the uprising over Kennedy's funeral about how it sholdn't happen since he supports abortion. I can guarantee you that the people bringing up the abortion issue to hold to the church's teaching on the death penalty. Should that be a "litmus" test on a Chatholic funeral? Sadly I see the same thing in many Mennonite church's around me-IE getting more and more conservative. I thought that this would be on the decline once Obama was elected but it just added steam to their position from the hate of the man.

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 9:47pm

If a church organization maintained a firm but consistent set of principles, I could respect that. I might disagree with them, but I would still respect them. But can anyone cite a case where a significant portion of the church rose up and protested the appearance of a political candidate who initiated an unjust war resulting in the killing of thousands of civilians?

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 2:55pm

You seem to be painting with a very wide brush, Cesar. People who follow the Church's teaching don't all "disregard the plight of the poor, or the exclusion of any group" just because they disagree with which policies will ameliorate the problem.

It seems that you disagree with Catholic teaching on a number of subjects but would rather discuss the "straw man" of "conservative Catholics."

"Catholicism should exclude individuals and groups who disagree with any one of the pope's "infallible" teachings."

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope (if your Catholic you really should capitalize the reference to the office out of respect, just as I would capitalize President when referring to the President) is infallible in matters of faith and morals? You seem to suggest this is something that was "invented" by some republican party operative.

"Sexual morality (i.e., use of contraception and marriage) is a crucial factor in determining one's orthodoxy." Again, doesn't the Catholic Church have a specific teaching on the subject? Did that originate with the republican party?

"Abortion trumps all other issues, including war, environmental destruction, and poverty." If destruction of the innocent human life in the womb is not categorically worse than poverty than the state should be allowed to force abortions in order to "cure" poverty as they do in China. Again, you seem to suggest that this is a 'conservative' talking point. It has been the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church that some things are intrinsically evil and others are not...

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 2:55pm

You seem to be painting with a very wide brush, Cesar. People who follow the Church's teaching don't all "disregard the plight of the poor, or the exclusion of any group" just because they disagree with which policies will ameliorate the problem.

It seems that you disagree with Catholic teaching on a number of subjects but would rather discuss the "straw man" of "conservative Catholics."

"Catholicism should exclude individuals and groups who disagree with any one of the pope's "infallible" teachings."

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope (if your Catholic you really should capitalize the reference to the office out of respect, just as I would capitalize President when referring to the President) is infallible in matters of faith and morals? You seem to suggest this is something that was "invented" by some republican party operative.

"Sexual morality (i.e., use of contraception and marriage) is a crucial factor in determining one's orthodoxy." Again, doesn't the Catholic Church have a specific teaching on the subject? Did that originate with the republican party?

"Abortion trumps all other issues, including war, environmental destruction, and poverty." If destruction of the innocent human life in the womb is not categorically worse than poverty than the state should be allowed to force abortions in order to "cure" poverty as they do in China. Again, you seem to suggest that this is a 'conservative' talking point. It has been the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church that some things are intrinsically evil and others are not...

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:03pm

Also,
I think that viewing Catholic teaching as simply a matter of Conservative/Progressive politics is itself contrary to Catholic teaching...
"Precisely because the Gospel is not an ideology, it does not presume to lock evolving socio-political realities into rigid schemas. Rather, it transcends the vicissitudes of this world and casts new light on the dignity of the human person in every age. Dear friends, let us ask the Lord to implant within us a spirit of courage to share the timeless saving truths which have shaped, and will continue to shape, the social and cultural progress of this continent.

The salvation wrought by Jesus's suffering, death, resurrection and ascension into heaven not only transforms us who believe in him, but urges us to share this Good News with others. Enlightened by the Spirit's gifts of knowledge, wisdom and understanding (cf. Is 11:1-2; Ex 35:31), may our capacity to grasp the truth taught by Jesus Christ impel us to work tirelessly for the unity he desires for all his children reborn through Baptism, and indeed for the whole human race.
Benedict XVI"
Address at Ecumenical Meeting
September 27, 2009

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:03pm

Also,
I think that viewing Catholic teaching as simply a matter of Conservative/Progressive politics is itself contrary to Catholic teaching...
"Precisely because the Gospel is not an ideology, it does not presume to lock evolving socio-political realities into rigid schemas. Rather, it transcends the vicissitudes of this world and casts new light on the dignity of the human person in every age. Dear friends, let us ask the Lord to implant within us a spirit of courage to share the timeless saving truths which have shaped, and will continue to shape, the social and cultural progress of this continent.

The salvation wrought by Jesus's suffering, death, resurrection and ascension into heaven not only transforms us who believe in him, but urges us to share this Good News with others. Enlightened by the Spirit's gifts of knowledge, wisdom and understanding (cf. Is 11:1-2; Ex 35:31), may our capacity to grasp the truth taught by Jesus Christ impel us to work tirelessly for the unity he desires for all his children reborn through Baptism, and indeed for the whole human race.
Benedict XVI"
Address at Ecumenical Meeting
September 27, 2009

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 3:18pm

Cesar,

You have two choices. You can remain (as I did for years) in a church which selectively applies Christ's teachings to be congruent with a conservative Republican mindset. Or you can move (as I finally did) to a church or church organization which does not mandate a particular political doctrine while it ministers to believers.

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 3:18pm

Cesar,

You have two choices. You can remain (as I did for years) in a church which selectively applies Christ's teachings to be congruent with a conservative Republican mindset. Or you can move (as I finally did) to a church or church organization which does not mandate a particular political doctrine while it ministers to believers.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:21pm

With respect to the Kennedy funeral... What Mr. Doyle said can be found here http://www.catholicactionleague.org/ I didn't see where Mr. Doyle called the late Senator a "false Catholic" Here is what Archbishop Raymond Burke had to say on the subject as reported in CNA: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17250

"In our time, there is a great hesitation to speak about scandal, as if, in some way, it is only a phenomenon among persons of small or unenlightened mind, and, therefore, a tool of such persons to condemn others rashly and wrongly," he observed.

In the archbishop's view, it is ironic that those who experience scandal at the "gravely sinful" public actions of a fellow Catholic are accused of "a lack of charity" and of causing division within the Church.

"Lying or failing to tell the truth, however, is never a sign of charity. A unity which is not founded on the truth of the moral law is not the unity of the Church. The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth with love," he remarked.

The contrary attitude is characteristic of a society governed by the "tyranny of relativism," one in which "political correctness and human respect" are the ultimate criteria, he said, warning that Catholics' consciences have become "dulled to the gravity of certain moral issues."

Archbishop Burke explained that the disciplines of the Church are not a judgment on the eternal salvation of someone's soul but are "simply the acknowledgment of an objective truth

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:21pm

With respect to the Kennedy funeral... What Mr. Doyle said can be found here http://www.catholicactionleague.org/ I didn't see where Mr. Doyle called the late Senator a "false Catholic" Here is what Archbishop Raymond Burke had to say on the subject as reported in CNA: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17250

"In our time, there is a great hesitation to speak about scandal, as if, in some way, it is only a phenomenon among persons of small or unenlightened mind, and, therefore, a tool of such persons to condemn others rashly and wrongly," he observed.

In the archbishop's view, it is ironic that those who experience scandal at the "gravely sinful" public actions of a fellow Catholic are accused of "a lack of charity" and of causing division within the Church.

"Lying or failing to tell the truth, however, is never a sign of charity. A unity which is not founded on the truth of the moral law is not the unity of the Church. The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth with love," he remarked.

The contrary attitude is characteristic of a society governed by the "tyranny of relativism," one in which "political correctness and human respect" are the ultimate criteria, he said, warning that Catholics' consciences have become "dulled to the gravity of certain moral issues."

Archbishop Burke explained that the disciplines of the Church are not a judgment on the eternal salvation of someone's soul but are "simply the acknowledgment of an objective truth

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:27pm

Again,
Why are you simply assuming that the Church is motivated to support the "Republican" party? The Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 3:27pm

Again,
Why are you simply assuming that the Church is motivated to support the "Republican" party? The Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 5:10pm

I am a "failed" Catholic. My increasing discomfort with the church's positions on ordination for women, the pronouncement of homosexuality as "disordered" in contradiction to the majority opinion of the clinical community, its seemingly systematic routing of the progressive elements in religious orders and local parishes, its growing intolerance of divergent opinions, and my overall discomfort with the monarchical structure of the church has prompted me, like SisterMarie, to move to a more progressive and tolerant community of followers of Jesus for my spiritual sustenance. It is a decision for me that is bearing spiritual fruit and peace daily. It is a joy to be in an environment that does not expend energy on divisiveness and has respect for differing opinions.

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 5:10pm

I am a "failed" Catholic. My increasing discomfort with the church's positions on ordination for women, the pronouncement of homosexuality as "disordered" in contradiction to the majority opinion of the clinical community, its seemingly systematic routing of the progressive elements in religious orders and local parishes, its growing intolerance of divergent opinions, and my overall discomfort with the monarchical structure of the church has prompted me, like SisterMarie, to move to a more progressive and tolerant community of followers of Jesus for my spiritual sustenance. It is a decision for me that is bearing spiritual fruit and peace daily. It is a joy to be in an environment that does not expend energy on divisiveness and has respect for differing opinions.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 5:44pm

Ford,
I appreciate your honesty and hope you find peace. But the point of the article appears to be that the current configuration of the Church is a product of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching. I also get the sense that those of us who don't wish to "leave" the Catholic Church are viewed as intolerant jerks who cling to arbitrary definitions or doctrines because we are "republican shills" We can't be given the benefit of the doubt that we wish to pass on to our children the faith as it was taught to us?

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 5:44pm

Ford,
I appreciate your honesty and hope you find peace. But the point of the article appears to be that the current configuration of the Church is a product of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching. I also get the sense that those of us who don't wish to "leave" the Catholic Church are viewed as intolerant jerks who cling to arbitrary definitions or doctrines because we are "republican shills" We can't be given the benefit of the doubt that we wish to pass on to our children the faith as it was taught to us?

by: WaveTossed

09-29-2009 @ 6:09pm

I am not Roman Catholic; I was raised Episcopalian and am comfortable in that denomination. So this is the view of an "outsider."

The idea that current Catholic theology is a result of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching" is misleading. The Roman Catholic church's theology has been of a top-down character -- which has included the doctrine of papal infallibility -- since the Roman Catholic church's early days. This was well before either the Republican or Democratic parties existed -- for that matter, well before the United States came into existence. One reason why the Church of England (the Episcopal church's fore-runner) broke away from the Roman Catholic church was on the matter of papal infallibility.

One of my main reasons for being Episcopalian and not Catholic is this issue of papal infallibility. I do not believe that a single human being, even the Pope, can be infallible. Only God is infallible.

by: WaveTossed

09-29-2009 @ 6:09pm

I am not Roman Catholic; I was raised Episcopalian and am comfortable in that denomination. So this is the view of an "outsider."

The idea that current Catholic theology is a result of "republican/conservative" infiltration of the Church's teaching" is misleading. The Roman Catholic church's theology has been of a top-down character -- which has included the doctrine of papal infallibility -- since the Roman Catholic church's early days. This was well before either the Republican or Democratic parties existed -- for that matter, well before the United States came into existence. One reason why the Church of England (the Episcopal church's fore-runner) broke away from the Roman Catholic church was on the matter of papal infallibility.

One of my main reasons for being Episcopalian and not Catholic is this issue of papal infallibility. I do not believe that a single human being, even the Pope, can be infallible. Only God is infallible.

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 6:24pm

I wholeheartedly respect those who stay in the Catholic Church. What I
could not abide personally is an environment that is becoming increasingly
strident and judgemental whether one attributes that to identification with
the GOP or not to me is irrelevant. At some point extreme differenes in
viewpoints will have to be left at the cross or the church will be
irreparably split. The church's progressive position on social and economic
justice is being threatened and I will not waste energy fighting that battle
internally...too much is at stake. I am in an environment that is moving
forward while accepting there are differences and laying them at the feet of
Jesus. My prayers are that Catholics and other followers of Jesus keep
their focus on Him.

by: ford49

09-29-2009 @ 6:24pm

I wholeheartedly respect those who stay in the Catholic Church. What I
could not abide personally is an environment that is becoming increasingly
strident and judgemental whether one attributes that to identification with
the GOP or not to me is irrelevant. At some point extreme differenes in
viewpoints will have to be left at the cross or the church will be
irreparably split. The church's progressive position on social and economic
justice is being threatened and I will not waste energy fighting that battle
internally...too much is at stake. I am in an environment that is moving
forward while accepting there are differences and laying them at the feet of
Jesus. My prayers are that Catholics and other followers of Jesus keep
their focus on Him.

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 7:11pm

Well WaveTossed,
For an "outsider" you heard my point loud and clear. Thank you for that... and look, I don't want to get into Catholic apologetics here... It just seems to me that there cannot be true ecumenism if we don't acknowledge we differ and where we differ. It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long. But I think to suggest that the RCC teaches that abortion is an intrinsic evil because the Pope likes Sarah Palin... well, that does a disservice to all denominations, really. It is a materialistic/political interpretation of doctrine when there isn't any historical basis for it....

by: RorateCaeli

09-29-2009 @ 7:11pm

Well WaveTossed,
For an "outsider" you heard my point loud and clear. Thank you for that... and look, I don't want to get into Catholic apologetics here... It just seems to me that there cannot be true ecumenism if we don't acknowledge we differ and where we differ. It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long. But I think to suggest that the RCC teaches that abortion is an intrinsic evil because the Pope likes Sarah Palin... well, that does a disservice to all denominations, really. It is a materialistic/political interpretation of doctrine when there isn't any historical basis for it....

by: nuclearferret

09-29-2009 @ 8:17pm

We get the point: Catholics should model the Democratic Party and the neo-liberal mantra presented by President Obama.

by: nuclearferret

09-29-2009 @ 8:17pm

We get the point: Catholics should model the Democratic Party and the neo-liberal mantra presented by President Obama.

by: Drixtrious

09-29-2009 @ 9:19pm

hey. It's me, one of your formal students at ACND, and I just want to know if we can communicate w/ each other. My e-mail, if u remember, is dandrix1@ hotmail.com

by: Drixtrious

09-29-2009 @ 9:19pm

hey. It's me, one of your formal students at ACND, and I just want to know if we can communicate w/ each other. My e-mail, if u remember, is dandrix1@ hotmail.com

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 9:47pm

If a church organization maintained a firm but consistent set of principles, I could respect that. I might disagree with them, but I would still respect them. But can anyone cite a case where a significant portion of the church rose up and protested the appearance of a political candidate who initiated an unjust war resulting in the killing of thousands of civilians?

by: SisterMarie

09-29-2009 @ 9:47pm

If a church organization maintained a firm but consistent set of principles, I could respect that. I might disagree with them, but I would still respect them. But can anyone cite a case where a significant portion of the church rose up and protested the appearance of a political candidate who initiated an unjust war resulting in the killing of thousands of civilians?

by: BuckeyeDon

09-29-2009 @ 11:30pm

uh, ferret, you missed the point. Totally. And the term neo-liberal describes the laissez-faire capitalists on the Right, not Obama.

by: BuckeyeDon

09-29-2009 @ 11:30pm

uh, ferret, you missed the point. Totally. And the term neo-liberal describes the laissez-faire capitalists on the Right, not Obama.

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 12:53am

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/20...
"In March 2003, just hours after the first American cruise missiles slammed into Baghdad, the Vatican proclaimed the nascent conflict a "defeat for reason and for the gospel." It was a war, said papal confidant Cardinal Roberto Tucci, that was "beyond all legality and all international legitimacy." Strong words coming from the clerical leaders of some 1.5 billion Roman Catholics and indicative of the rift that still dogs relations between the president and the pope."
According to Catholic teaching, the use of military force is not an intrinsic evil as is abortion. The use of such force is subject to several conditions on whose existence reasonable people can disagree. However, there is no reasonable disagreement in case of procured abortion. This is easily discoverable using many resources on the internet. Again I ask, the Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 12:53am

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/20...
"In March 2003, just hours after the first American cruise missiles slammed into Baghdad, the Vatican proclaimed the nascent conflict a "defeat for reason and for the gospel." It was a war, said papal confidant Cardinal Roberto Tucci, that was "beyond all legality and all international legitimacy." Strong words coming from the clerical leaders of some 1.5 billion Roman Catholics and indicative of the rift that still dogs relations between the president and the pope."
According to Catholic teaching, the use of military force is not an intrinsic evil as is abortion. The use of such force is subject to several conditions on whose existence reasonable people can disagree. However, there is no reasonable disagreement in case of procured abortion. This is easily discoverable using many resources on the internet. Again I ask, the Church has consistently taught as it does for centuries. If you disagree with the teaching why must you impute this motive on the Church? Isn't that an exaggeration of others' beliefs, unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. Should you extend the benefit of the doubt to the Catholic Church? Perhaps, in their institutional judgement there's is a proper ordering of morality? How is rebuking Catholics who are trying to follow the teachings of the Church, charitable, SisterMarie?

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 9:57am

I have noticed and blogged about this for some time now. There are many converts to Catholocism from the repuplican party. One is Sam Brownback from my state of Kansas. A mennonite pastor Shane Hipps from Phoenix wrote a book on the subject of how the media we are around influences us and since the Catholic system has many symbols it appeals to those growning up with symbols, etc. Goes into great depth in the book.

I have also said on this blog that the conservative Catholics pick and choose the church's teachings. Remember all the uprising over Kennedy's funeral about how it sholdn't happen since he supports abortion. I can guarantee you that the people bringing up the abortion issue to hold to the church's teaching on the death penalty. Should that be a "litmus" test on a Chatholic funeral? Sadly I see the same thing in many Mennonite church's around me-IE getting more and more conservative. I thought that this would be on the decline once Obama was elected but it just added steam to their position from the hate of the man.

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 9:57am

I have noticed and blogged about this for some time now. There are many converts to Catholocism from the repuplican party. One is Sam Brownback from my state of Kansas. A mennonite pastor Shane Hipps from Phoenix wrote a book on the subject of how the media we are around influences us and since the Catholic system has many symbols it appeals to those growning up with symbols, etc. Goes into great depth in the book.

I have also said on this blog that the conservative Catholics pick and choose the church's teachings. Remember all the uprising over Kennedy's funeral about how it sholdn't happen since he supports abortion. I can guarantee you that the people bringing up the abortion issue to hold to the church's teaching on the death penalty. Should that be a "litmus" test on a Chatholic funeral? Sadly I see the same thing in many Mennonite church's around me-IE getting more and more conservative. I thought that this would be on the decline once Obama was elected but it just added steam to their position from the hate of the man.

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 11:32am

"I can guarantee you that the people bringing up the abortion issue to hold to the church's teaching on the death penalty." By the rest of your post I take it you meant that "conservative" Catholics who support the Church's teaching on abortion don't support the Church's teaching on the death penalty? Do you guarantee that? And there is no other rational or reasonable explanation other than they are being hypocrites or due to politics? Is this your point?

I am not a Mennonite but I am Roman Catholic and there is an ordering to the Church's teaching on morality. The murder of an innocent human life through procured abortion is intrinsically evil according to the Church's teaching. While in most cases, the death penalty is not moral, especially in societies were permanent incarceration is an option, it is not immoral in all cases. In the case of the United States being that there is the option of permanent incarceration. See CCC 2267.

Why do you simply assume that there isn't a thoughtful and reasonable basis for this position? You also seem to sugget that Catholics and Mennonites who disagree with President Obama's policies simply hate him. That is a pretty sweeping generalization and contrary to the Comment Code isn't it? Should you give them the benefit of the doubt even if you disagree with them?
Regarding the Kennedy funeral, there is a post about it below quoting Archbishop Raymond Burke on the subject.

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 11:32am

"I can guarantee you that the people bringing up the abortion issue to hold to the church's teaching on the death penalty." By the rest of your post I take it you meant that "conservative" Catholics who support the Church's teaching on abortion don't support the Church's teaching on the death penalty? Do you guarantee that? And there is no other rational or reasonable explanation other than they are being hypocrites or due to politics? Is this your point?

I am not a Mennonite but I am Roman Catholic and there is an ordering to the Church's teaching on morality. The murder of an innocent human life through procured abortion is intrinsically evil according to the Church's teaching. While in most cases, the death penalty is not moral, especially in societies were permanent incarceration is an option, it is not immoral in all cases. In the case of the United States being that there is the option of permanent incarceration. See CCC 2267.

Why do you simply assume that there isn't a thoughtful and reasonable basis for this position? You also seem to sugget that Catholics and Mennonites who disagree with President Obama's policies simply hate him. That is a pretty sweeping generalization and contrary to the Comment Code isn't it? Should you give them the benefit of the doubt even if you disagree with them?
Regarding the Kennedy funeral, there is a post about it below quoting Archbishop Raymond Burke on the subject.

by: wjschroeder

09-30-2009 @ 3:43pm

nothing like sojo putting people who have a different view point into a "GROUP" ands saying they are wrong, and all the while saying its wrong to do this, and all the while not realizing they do this all the time, all the while denying, all the while continueing to do, all the while praising obama for every little move he makes, all the while, ignoring all the broken promises he told them during his campaign, all the while having no idea how to DESCERN anything. All the while having no idea how to look at ALL the FACTS on subjects they speak on. I could go on and on, but all the while I am it would just be ignored.

by: wjschroeder

09-30-2009 @ 3:43pm

nothing like sojo putting people who have a different view point into a "GROUP" ands saying they are wrong, and all the while saying its wrong to do this, and all the while not realizing they do this all the time, all the while denying, all the while continueing to do, all the while praising obama for every little move he makes, all the while, ignoring all the broken promises he told them during his campaign, all the while having no idea how to DESCERN anything. All the while having no idea how to look at ALL the FACTS on subjects they speak on. I could go on and on, but all the while I am it would just be ignored.

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 4:48pm

Well Wjschroeder,
Since you put it that way.... I suppose you are suggesting that if I click the "report" button that nothing will be done to curb the assumption that, if you are a Catholic adheres to the Churchs teaching on morality that you are a republican operative or otherwise an unspiritual hypocrite who uses the Churchs teaching as cover for disagreeing with President Obama....
I did get that feeling. : )

Don't get frustrated

by: RorateCaeli

09-30-2009 @ 4:48pm

Well Wjschroeder,
Since you put it that way.... I suppose you are suggesting that if I click the "report" button that nothing will be done to curb the assumption that, if you are a Catholic adheres to the Churchs teaching on morality that you are a republican operative or otherwise an unspiritual hypocrite who uses the Churchs teaching as cover for disagreeing with President Obama....
I did get that feeling. : )

Don't get frustrated

by: pawheel

09-30-2009 @ 5:06pm

SisterMarie,
What church is it that you moved on to? I had to leave my Southern Baptist church because I could no longer stand to hear our last President praised almost as much as Jesus in the sermons.

by: pawheel

09-30-2009 @ 5:06pm

SisterMarie,
What church is it that you moved on to? I had to leave my Southern Baptist church because I could no longer stand to hear our last President praised almost as much as Jesus in the sermons.

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 10:20pm

Yes, I did generalize a bit didn't I! You mentioned a thoughtful and reasonable basis. Was it a thoughtful and reasonable basis for what happened to Obama at Notre Dame? Ws it ok what happened to Kennedy by trying to deny him a Catholic funderal? One more reason I'm not a Catholic. You don't think there is hate of Obama? Come on. Can you name a Catholic politician that has been antiabortion that is also anti death penalty?

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 10:20pm

Yes, I did generalize a bit didn't I! You mentioned a thoughtful and reasonable basis. Was it a thoughtful and reasonable basis for what happened to Obama at Notre Dame? Ws it ok what happened to Kennedy by trying to deny him a Catholic funderal? One more reason I'm not a Catholic. You don't think there is hate of Obama? Come on. Can you name a Catholic politician that has been antiabortion that is also anti death penalty?

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 10:26pm

You should have read the "prayer" that my former conservative republican church sent out to all it's members right before the election. Very pro republican and demonizing to Obama. Very sad indeed. I'm glad I made the move a couple yrs earlier.

by: kansasmennonite

09-30-2009 @ 10:26pm

You should have read the "prayer" that my former conservative republican church sent out to all it's members right before the election. Very pro republican and demonizing to Obama. Very sad indeed. I'm glad I made the move a couple yrs earlier.

by: josieperl47

10-01-2009 @ 12:12am

"It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long."

When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that abortion is intrinsically evil and immoral?

When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that being a homosexual is intrinsically evil and immoral?

by: josieperl47

10-01-2009 @ 12:12am

"It is a matter of historical fact as to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught and for how long."

When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that abortion is intrinsically evil and immoral?

When did the Roman Catholic Church begin teaching that being a homosexual is intrinsically evil and immoral?

by: josieperl47

10-01-2009 @ 12:22am

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals? <<<<<

Only when he speaks "ex cathedra."

by: josieperl47

10-01-2009 @ 12:22am

Doesn't the Church teach that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals? <<<<<

Only when he speaks "ex cathedra."

by: RorateCaeli

10-01-2009 @ 1:21am

Since at least the apostolic era but clearly before the the 2000 election.

by: RorateCaeli

10-01-2009 @ 1:21am

Since at least the apostolic era but clearly before the the 2000 election.